Can a Georgia maker argue I knowingly used a dangerous product anyway?

· 3 min read

A manufacturer can raise the argument that an injured person voluntarily chose to use a product despite knowing its danger. This is the assumption-of-risk idea, and in Georgia it can reduce or, in strong cases, defeat a product claim. But it is a fact-intensive defense that requires more than showing the product was generally risky.

What the defense actually requires

The core of this argument is that the injured person had actual knowledge of the specific danger, understood and appreciated the risk it posed, and chose to proceed anyway. Each part matters. Vague awareness that a product could be hazardous is not the same as knowing the particular danger that caused the harm. A manufacturer relying on this theory generally has to show the person genuinely understood the specific risk and made a deliberate decision to encounter it.

Even though O.C.G.A. § 51-1-11 subjects the maker of a defective product to strict liability in Georgia, that statute does not take from a defendant the ability to argue that an informed, voluntary choice by the user broke the connection between the product and the injury.

Knowing use versus ordinary carelessness

There is a meaningful difference between knowingly confronting a known danger and simply being careless. Ordinary carelessness is handled through Georgia’s comparative-fault rules. Knowingly and voluntarily proceeding in the face of a clearly understood, specific risk is a distinct theory that focuses on the user’s subjective awareness. Whether a given set of facts amounts to one or the other often depends on:

  • What the person actually knew about the specific hazard.
  • Whether warnings or experience made that danger clear.
  • Whether the choice to use the product was truly voluntary.

How it affects recovery

Even when some knowing use is shown, the outcome runs through Georgia’s modified comparative-fault statute, O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33. The jury fixes a fault percentage for the injured person, pares the recovery to match, and forecloses it once the figure reaches half. So this defense can shrink a recovery or, where the evidence of a deliberate, informed choice is strong, end it.

The bottom line

A Georgia manufacturer can argue that an injured person knowingly used a dangerous product, but the defense requires proof of actual knowledge of the specific risk, an appreciation of it, and a voluntary decision to proceed. Short of that, the conduct is usually treated as ordinary carelessness and folded into Georgia’s percentage-based fault analysis rather than serving as an automatic bar.

This article is for general educational and informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship, and Georgia law may change. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed Georgia personal injury attorney.

Related:

  1. Do I have to prove the maker was negligent to win a Georgia product defect case? Not necessarily. Georgia recognizes a strict liability path against a product's manufacturer that does not require proof of negligence at all. The injured person focuses on the product's defective condition......
  2. Can I still sue after 10 years if the maker hid a known product danger in Georgia? Concealment of a known hazard can change the analysis. Although Georgia's ten-year statute of repose in O.C.G.A. § 51-1-11 ends most product-defect claims a decade after a product's first sale,......
  3. Can I sue the maker of one defective component inside a larger product in Georgia? The company that made a single defective part inside a larger product can be a proper defendant in Georgia. A component maker is the manufacturer of its own part, and......
  4. How do Georgia courts decide if a product design is unreasonably dangerous? Georgia courts judge whether a design is unreasonably dangerous by weighing the design's risks against its benefits. This risk-utility test asks whether a reasonable manufacturer, aware of the dangers, would......
  5. Can the driver who rear-ended me argue I was actually to blame in Georgia? Yes. The driver who struck you from behind is allowed to claim that your own conduct caused or contributed to the crash, and Georgia law gives that argument real teeth......
  6. Can a defendant use my airbag vest or armor to argue my injuries were avoidable in Georgia? A defense lawyer can raise the subject of an airbag vest or body armor in a Georgia case, but it usually works against the defendant's own narrative rather than for......
  7. Can the other driver argue I wasn’t wearing a helmet to reduce my Georgia injury claim? A defendant may try to raise the absence of a helmet, because Georgia requires motorcyclists to wear approved headgear and ties damages to comparative fault. Whether that argument actually shrinks......
  8. What evidence can a defendant use to argue I share blame for my own injuries? A defendant trying to pin part of the blame on the injured person can draw on the same kinds of proof used to establish negligence generally, applied in reverse. The......
  9. Can I recover if a dangerous railroad crossing caused my Georgia motorcycle accident? Recovery is possible when a hazardous railroad crossing causes a motorcycle wreck in Georgia, but these claims involve an unusual mix of potential defendants and overlapping duties. A crossing can......
  10. How do I prove a Georgia business actually knew about the dangerous condition before I fell? Actual knowledge means an employee or the business itself was aware of the specific hazard before the fall, and proving it usually requires evidence that someone connected to the store......
  11. Can crime in the surrounding neighborhood prove a Georgia property was dangerous? Crime in the surrounding neighborhood can help show that a Georgia property posed a foreseeable danger, but it rarely does the job by itself. Georgia considers area crime as one......
  12. Must a Georgia owner have known about a dangerous condition before being liable? Generally yes, but "known" includes more than actual awareness. For an invitee's claim, Georgia requires that the owner had either actual or constructive knowledge of the hazard. Constructive knowledge fills......
  13. What is the difference between a dangerous and vicious dog classification in Georgia? The line between a "dangerous dog" and a "vicious dog" in Georgia comes down to the severity of the harm involved, with the vicious label reserved for animals that have......
  14. Is a dangerous medication dosage error grounds for a Georgia malpractice claim? A harmful dosing mistake can be grounds for a Georgia malpractice claim when it reflects a deviation from accepted practice and injures the patient. Dosage errors are a recognized category......
  15. How do I show the owner knew their dog was dangerous in Georgia? Demonstrating the owner's knowledge is usually the decisive task in a Georgia dog-bite case, because liability rests on the owner's awareness of the animal's dangerous tendency. The proof is built......

Leave a Reply